On Sat, 2017-08-26 at 23:39 -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> > P.S. to get the most bang for your synchronous buck, you want a
> > preemptive wakeup.. but that butts heads with the fair engine.
> >
>
> By preemptive wake up I guess you mean the waker would give up its
> time slice and let the wakee use it? That's a cool idea but I agree it
> would be against the fair task behavior.
No, I meant a preemption, that being the cheapest switch. Any mucking
about with vruntime is a non-starter (NAK bait), making guaranteed
preemption a non-starter.
-Mike
